Screwed up burials. Re-used old coffins (honestly once you were past 100 years dead your coffin was fair game. Suck it). Weāve even got cases where a coffin had been made for the matriarch of the family, and then her teenage son dies before her. Because wood was expensive, and coffins took a long time to make, the family wentĀ āok niankhamun is going in nesmutās coffinā and buried him that way.Ā
Then we get to the Late Period archaising and oh boy do we have some fun. Due to the Egyptian habit of being nostalgic for what they considered better periods of their history (oh wait where have I heard that before?) they tended to try to copyĀ āstylesā of art from other periods without knowing the full decorum. So, as is the case with the Late Period, itād become a mish mash ofĀ āok so this is Amarna style paunch art, but weāre using the feminine coffin pose from the New Kingdom, and our art grid is off by one so everyone looks elongatedā. They literally write about themselves being proud of copying these older art styles.Ā
I know this site likes to think in black and white terms, with a heavy amount of anti-intellectual bias, but reality is more complicated than youād like, as is history. Knowing the full cultural context for why historical people did what they did is vital, because otherwise we assume they thought the same way we do about topics such as this, and thatās where you fall into theĀ ābiasā trap. If you donāt look at something in Ancient Egypt and sayĀ āwell what do the Egyptians themselves tell us about thisā and just immediately head toĀ āwell itās this way now so archaeologists must have missed something what idiotsā then youāre doing a bad job of working with the material presented to you.Ā
As for Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep, well this site likes to twist their narrative pretty hard, as you can see from the above. Yeah, theyāre mlm couple. Thatās been the accepted narrative (bar a few outliers) for about 40 years, and it was even suggested way before that. Idk, might be a good idea to read something written after 1970 if youāre trying to get current thinking on the subject. Or you know, stuff published this century. Basing your ideas of what archaeologists think currently on publications from the 60s is as bad as assuming that scientists now have the same ideas about disease as they did in the 60s. Things move on.Ā
Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep are not depicted as different sizes, thus making one moreĀ āfeminineā. Theyāre depicted as the same size, because itās not just your gender in Egyptian art decorum that determines your size but also your rank and power. Look:
Here they are embracing, in what is a depiction of a kiss. Theyāre the same size.Ā
Here they are at the entrance. Same size.Ā
Here they are kissing again. Same size.Ā
One last time. Same size.Ā
(Iāve been to this tomb. Seen it in person. Itās very gay)
There are also loads of examples where women are not depicted as āsmallā, in fact that statement in and of itself is rather a generalisation than the actual rule. Hereās Menna and his wife:
Hereās Inherkhau and his wife and children:
And because Iām feeling petty, have one more. Hereās Irynefer and his wife:
Idk about you guys, but doesnāt seem right does it? Really, size in these tomb paintings is all about the importance of the figure, in this case the deceased, rather than their gender. The only reason they would be not of the same size in the tomb is when one is as an Osiris. When that happens the figure who is larger, and yeah itās usually the man because you rarely get womenās tombs because theyāre buried with their husbands, is representative of the deceased beingĀ āhonouredā as anĀ āOsirisā (you become an Osiris after death in Egypt). The size of the person depicts their importance as the revered deceased and not because one is a woman. Take here for example the tomb of Sennefer:
You can see Sennefer as the revered dead on the right, being offered a lotus (Iāll get onto that in a sec) by his wife. Sheās offering him rebirth. It is only this scene in which she is depicted smaller, because on the left (at an angle) you can see them bothā¦.portrayed as the same size. Hereās another image of them together:
It is only when she is offering to him as a revered, and more important, deceased person that she is smaller. Decorum dictates that the more important you are the larger you are, so the tomb owner will always be depicted as larger than pretty much everyone else. If Khnumhotep is offering a lotus flower to Niankhkhnum, it is because Niankhkhnum at that point is the revered dead. It has nothing to do with Khnumhotep beingĀ āfeminineā. The narrative that one of them must be taking theĀ āfeminineā role seems kindaā¦.not good?Ā Ā
As for the symbol of a lotus flower? Thatās nothing to do withĀ āfemininityā. At all. In Egyptian culture, the lotus flower symbolised power and rebirth, as in one creation myth, the mound grew from the waters of Nun, and from this mound grew a lotus flower. When this lotus flower opened it provided the firstĀ āmanā and thatās how mankind came into existence. This is why we have a statue of Tutankhamun emerging from a Lotus flower.Ā
Khnumhotep offering this flower to Niankhkhnum is not symbolising hisĀ āfemininityā itās offering him rebirth into the afterlife. A symbol that was extremely important in Ancient Egypt.Ā
Oh and finally, Archaeologists from 1964, and up until the early 80s, thought they were brothers because thatās literally what they refer to each other as. They call each otherĀ āsn=iāĀ āmy brotherā. Yeah it seems obvious now that theyāre not, but when you start translating something youāre not looking at anything deeper. If it says they were brothers, and they themselves have said this, why would we think differently? It was not until the mid 70s when we worked out that Middle Egyptian Hieroglyphs (though theyāre using Old Egyptian, but the flaw is the same) has limited words for family. We only have words for: father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter, husband, and wife. There are no words forĀ āuncleā orĀ ācousinā orĀ ānephewā. So we ended up having to go back and reassess some stuff, and it turned out where someone had saidĀ āso and so is my fatherā theyāre actually sayingĀ āso and so is my grandfather or uncleā and the same goes forĀ āson/nephewā, cousins are brothers and sisters. Yes, there was some absolute homophobia going on when it was first suggested that they might not actually be brothers, but lovers. There are some that still think this way. But the vast majority no longer hold this view, and havenāt since the 1980s.Ā
Here is a link to everything we currently know about the presence of LGBT individuals in Ancient Egypt. Itās written by an excellent Egyptologist (Deborah Sweeney), and has an extensive bibliography on everything written so far about LGBT individuals in Ancient Egypt often by LGBT Egyptologist and Archaeologists themselves.Ā The PDF is free to read, and was published in 2011.
Please stop believing that the homophobia of 1920s, or even 1970s, scholars is still the most current and widely held belief in Egyptology. By perpetuating this view, you harm those scholars, many of whom are LGBT themselves, who are trying to get out there and make themselves heard on this topic. Theyāre working tirelessly to change this perception and the narrative Tumblr likes to push is actively harming their work.Ā
